/lit/ - Literature

>>11264832
she went full retard

>>11264832
yes.

>>11264832
I don't know who that is.

>>11264832
Considering her books are often interrupted by asinine and dozens of pages long monologues that totally destroy the flow of writing, I'd have to say yes.

>>11264832
No, only literary snobs and communists think so

There is something of an embargo on actually addressing her arguments in liberal circles, they prefer to just restate their beliefs that capitalism is bad for black people and that her prose is ungainly. I am not a randian, but her attempts to compatibilize spirituality and materialism in a century where most thinkers opted for one or the other, was at the very least, kind of interesting and something I view as the last great rationalist attempt to stave off nihilism in the west by offering a system that was intended to preserve something akin to a "human essence" in an increasingly inhuman age without rejecting the gains made by technology or modernity. Hitler attempted the same thing but took the irrationalist route. The systems envisioned by both were inadequate and ultimately failures, consequently the world fills up with Kaczynskis and Nick Lands and those who still believe in a middle path look increasingly absurd.

Her fiction sucks.

>>11264849
I just want to restart brain not to know who that is.

>>11264832
Congratulations! You have once again succeeded in posting a thinly-veiled 'literature' thread with the intention to gossip like a schoolgirl!

>>11264832

God I wish that was me.

>>11264832
Went to a libertarian conference. It wasn't so bad save for all the repetitions of "Who is John Galt?"

>>11264832
Yes. You could put Hitler, Stalin, Hillary Clinton, Roger Scruton and Pope Francis together and they wouldn't be as morally bankrupt as her.

>>11264832
Her writing is tedious and full of mary sues but she at least understood how absolutely retarded egalitarianism is and that puts her above most modern people.

>>11265053
I may, in fact, actually know who that is but not know I know simply because I have a horrific memory for faces. It's bad enough that I have not recognised members of my immediate family on occasion, so OP posting a black and white photograph of someone without including the name either in the filename or the post means I have no way of knowing who we are talking about.

Then no one else in the thread mentions who the person pictured is by name, either.

It is very unhelpful.

>>11265178
just reverse image search it.
she's ayn rand

>>11265211
How unfortunate for her.

>>11265178
I'd know that ugly mug anywhere.

>>11264832
She's the last great bastion of enlightenment thought, put Kant in his place.

>>11264832
Brainlet extraordinaire and most evil person to ever live.

No, she's worse.

>>11264832
OH NO NO NO
JUST LOOK AT THE TOP OF HER HEAD

>>11264832
She looks fine to me.

>>11264832
Friends don't let friends read Ayn Rand.

90% of all the shitstorms involving Ayn Rand discussions are because she had a really annoying and belligerent personality. She could have written that water is wet and the sky is blue and people would still be reluctant to agree with her because of how awkward she would have made it.

EVOLUTIONARY PSYCHOLOGIST DOCTOR JORDAN BAUDRILLARD PETERSON ABSOLUTELY SMASHES FEMINISM BUT ONLY IF YOU SAGE THIS THREAD WITH: "CLEAN YOUR ROOM, LOBSTERBOY!"

>>11264941
You forgot to mention smart people too

>>11264832
Lit shits on her because she isn't part of the avant garde, fact is she was a great thinker and her books have beemn massively influentioal.

>>11264832
As a person, she legitimately was. She was a snitch, cheated on her husband despited that making him miserable(but threw a fit when her lover got some action with a younger, hotter babe), alienated most members of her association/cult by being an abrasive cunt, and was a huge hypocrite.

>>11265536
>her books have beemn massively influentioal.
>doubt.jpg
On whom has she been influential? What universities have her on their reading list, either as literature or philosophy? Has any intellectual cited her?
Rand is like L Ron Hubbard, only of interest to the cultists, not to society at large

>>11265610
>thinking I'll do your search for you.

>>11265623
You can't name a single university?

>>11265536
>Lit
redditors out please

>>11265610
Atlas Shrugged comes in second to the Bible for American polls asking things like 'What book influenced your life the most" and any time there is a significant recession sales for the book enter the best sellers list. That said institutional influence is pretty negligible besides Alan Greenspan, and by the time he had any actual sway he had compromised on most of her dogma.

>>11265638
>Atlas Shrugged comes in second to the Bible for American polls asking things like 'What book influenced your life the most"
perfectly captures the burger mind

>>11265625
>He thinks universities are where intellectual advances are made nowadays

>>11265667
As opposed to what? Objectivist blogs and /pol/?

>>11265685
Industry my dude.

Can someone explain to me why Rand and some conservative speakers seem to sperg out about how much they despise Kant?

>>11265729
http://bleedingheartlibertarians.com/2014/07/rand-on-kant-lets-use-this-as-a-teaching-moment/
They're essentially polar opposites, in their minds Kants autism ruined philosphy for everyone until she fixed it far too late.

>>11265729
actually good question. I don't know but I would bet that it's because they're dumb